Product Description

Review

"There is no more cunning player of the murder game than Agatha Christie" Sunday Times "A masterwork of carefully concealed artifice... most stunningly original" Julian Symons
--This text refers to the
Hardcover
edition.

From the Back Cover

There’s a serial killer on the loose, workinghis way through the alphabet and the wholecountry is in a state of panic.

A is for Mrs. Ascher in Andover, B is for BettyBarnard in Bexhill, C is for Sir Carmichael Clarkein Churston. With each murder, the killer is gettingmore confident—but leaving a trail of deliberateclues to taunt the proud Hercule Poirot might justprove to be the first, and fatal, mistake.

Most helpful customer reviews

Dame Agatha Christie may have revolutionized the mystery genre, and her detectives are undoubtedly clever, the cases certainly puzzling, and the solutions are deffinatley surprising. The problem is in the superhuman nature of her characters.(Warning: Plot Spoilers Ahead)Take the solution to the ABC murders, for example. Somehow, Poirot managed to figure out that Cust was innocent, and unravel an extremely complx murder/frame up plot by one of the victim's family members. Very clever, but by the logic he used, ANY NUMBER OF OTHER SOLUTIONS WOULD BE EQUALLY POSSIBLE. The way he arranges what scant clues he has into this elaborate solution is kind of like trying to solve the New York Times Crossward puzzle with only the clue to 43 down.And not to mention the fact that her books are so mind-numbingly boring! Absolutely nothing in the way of solving the case happens in between, and the reader finds themselves propelled through the plot by only the curiosity to know the outcome. And sometimes that isn't enough.

This woman is a killer in murder stories. She has no complex with Sherlock Holmes always in the wings and she is able to do things differently and yet in the tradition. The tradition here is of course the revelation of the real culprit in a conference by Hercule Poirot in the last five pages of the book. The tradition is to use Hercule Poirot's brains more than his magnifying glass. Already a difference in this similarity. But then everything is very different, is in a definitely more modern mood. Hercule Poirot is looking for the psyche of this serial killer and the motivation he has. He follows the line of a madman on the loose and yet keeps his awareness open to facts that could lead to a completely different solution, and sure enough it is the psychology and motivation necessary for these crimes to appear logical that enables Hercule Poirot to tell the name of the killer. This is more important than real evidence which can always be collected afterwards when the mystery is cleared. In other words Agatha Christie is already in 1936 on a « profiling » line that will appear in the world as a standard method only in the 1980s in the FBI to answer the challenge of serial killers. She is in other words postmodern when everyone is nothing but premodern. She is ahead of her times and by at least one if not two generations. The story itself is fabulous in the way it is organized and told. Suspense is perfect. The mystery is dense and dark. The solution is clear and logical. There is only one difficult element : two girls, two victims have a birthday before their murders and their parents or relatives buy them silk stochings for this same reason. This is a little bit coincidental.Read more ›

Poirot has gotten a letter challenging him to stop a murder. He is given the date and location, the letter is signed ABC. The police dismiss the incident as yet another harmless crank letter - until a murder takes place on the day and time stated in the letter and an ABC railway guide is found on the scene. More letters arrive and a pattern begins to form, the killer is working his way through victims and towns alphabetically - Ascher in Andover, Barnard in Bexhill, Clarke in Chruston... Poirot and the police are in pursuit but always it seems a frustrating step behind. Ultimately Poirot is successful of course. The solution to the crime is clever and original, even by Christie standards.This is a departure from the usual 'cozy' style that is more typical of Christie (ie confined location, murderer and victim know each other, motive clearly established, little focus on the crime itself). This is darker than her usual work, the victims are seemingly chosen at random, the entire country is threatened, and the messages from the killer are reminiscent of Jack the Ripper.Poirot gives a description of the killer based on the letters and evidence collected at the crime, in a manner that is very like a modern day profiler. Keep in mind that this book was written nearly 80 years ago.If you are a Christie fan this is definitely a must read but if you are looking for a more comfortable 'cozy' you may find this one a bit disturbing.

this was my first Agatha Christie book, and she's undoubtedly brilliant, weaves together an exceedingly tight book which flies right along, and is not written for dummies by any means, in case you happen to think murder mysteries were for people who lacked intelligence...but my problems: shallow emotional depth in characters. I know, you could argue that people don't read murder mysteries for emotional depth, but regardless, this book lacked it. it's just junk food. no substance. well, though not entirely, because she does give out some insightful philosophy near the end, all about intuition versus experienced reasoning, etc., and about really understanding WHY a person does what he does, what really motivates someone.my question: why, deep inside Agatha Christie, would SHE write a book like this, and I'm convinced that she did because she was brilliant in the emotional sphere she ventured into in her life, but that she was so utterly blocked off from other parts of herself that she was unable to venture into them in her writing. the result: she wrote these kinds of books (well, I've only read one, but I'll assume they suffice for the rest) that looked at just a very SLIM part of the human experience...also, I think psychologically this book is all unconsciously about the child overcoming the parent, which is a complete fantasy, the child in this case being Poirot and the parents being so many people - the deceptive murderer, the fancy and arrogant police. it's a big ol' grandiose fantasy, and that, I think, is why so many people are drawn to it. I admit, I liked it, and I felt pretty omnipotent reading it and identifying with Poirot...Read more ›